htarragon
-
Posts
2,427 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by htarragon
-
-
<p>Ruslan, I like your portraits very much. I mostly use my 50-300 for outdoor portraits. I've been trying to use my Rokinon 85mm Manual Focus but getting accurate focus at a distance is really difficult wide open - nice bokeh, though. I have the Tamron 9omm f/2.8 macro which I have not really used for portraits, but I'm going to try it, given the focus issues with the Rokinon. One has to watch out for too sharp portraits with a macro.</p>
-
<p>The Nikkor is $100 dollars less @ B&H.. So, we're obviously not going for competitive pricing anymore. I wonder how they stack up against each other.</p>
-
<p>I just received an e-mail from RICOH, offering a new DA 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6 ED DC WR @ $749.99. A couple of months ago, I purchased a Tamron 24-75mm f2.8 for approximately the same price. I'm sort of glad that Pentax didn't come out with their lens sooner. I bought the Tamron because of the f/2.8 aperture for portraits. The wider range of the Pentax would have been tempting, since I could have taken the kit 18-55 out of my bag and would have had a more useful wide angle-short tele. But I think for portraits, the f/2.8 will be more useful.</p>
-
-
-
-
-
<p>Matt - Those rainbows are incredible!<br>
Harry - Maybe I should give my portraits a black background and see what happens!</p>
-
-
-
-
-
<p>My faves this week:<br>
Duane #3,<br>
Doug #3,<br>
Harry #1,<br>
Yury #4,<br>
Dave #3 Amazing at that distance,<br>
Dorus #1,<br>
Matt #1,<br>
Bob #1,<br>
Haig #1/#4,<br>
Nick #1 & 2 Never gotten a "stink eye" like that!<br>
Onward to Sunday!</p>
-
<p>What bout the woman's portrait?</p>
-
<p>Harry,<br /> That might have been one of Javier Gutierrrez's threads and he and the mods had disagreements over those. Extended posts, even in their own thread, are limited -I don't know what the limit is, nor the reason, really. Well, posting major portfolios could be a problem. That's why we have personal galleries.<br /> Do you do portraits, anymore? I like the one I usually see at the bottom of the thread.</p>
-
<p>Harry, Sorry for stepping into your posts, but you had already posted four. Posting six and seven was stepping into mine. The informal limit has been four; the technical limit is three. Let's keep our enthusiasm under control?</p>
-
-
-
<p>Is this a smile?</p>
-
-
-
<p>Nick - John is correct, that is the Chrysler Building, but you've caught an 1890 lamppost, a 1930's building, newer, blander buildings (although the bottom center one might have been interesting) and the "new normal".<br>
The shots of Lady Liberty and lower Manhattan are excellent as well as the Jersey skyline.. The Mail Hall ceiling at Ellis Island has a Guastavino tile ceiling. They're thin tiles (not bricks) structurally very stable and fireproof. If you were near the Oyster Bar in Grand Central Station, you would have seen the same tiles.<br>
You've made me curious about the Q. I'll have to take another look. You can fit K lenses on it with an adapter, yes?</p>
<p>Nicely done!</p>
-
<p>Don - I like the drama of the last one<br>
Dorus - the patterns of the bridge - I like the way the straight lines curve. <br>
Harry - the edge of the cliff - the way you lead the eye. Apple tree? Where? Building really interesting.<br>
Nick- the 02 shot with the lone tree in the distance. I see the pumpkins, but the tree makes it.<br>
Matt - #1 - Very interesting, #2 Fully expect King Kong to come into the frame #3 - Your usual shot of magnificent scenery<br>
Haig - My fave is #4 but is Lake Tipsoo a little tipsy? </p>
<p>Nice shots this week! We'll have to do it again!</p>
-
100/2.8 WR macro
in Pentax
Posted